I remember when it was difficult to hold my views on putting the world to rights. Things we once called progress are now widely considered maladaptive and self-annihilating.
We live in a fast-food culture of instant gratification, entertainment and fame so anything that makes you more of a fluffer is a good thing. Theatrics and provocation, the truth is people don't want to know you really are. However you might care who a famous person really was because they're famous, because you're been drawn in by the show. Dating works the same way
Some sort of happy medium between that and the lady is not for turning. We don't want to be dragged around on a leash by a pitbull or leave our children alone with such a vicious terror, yet we do like to go outside and hear you say what you actually mean once in a while
Not feminine to the point where you can't do anything, paralysed inside the house the whole time. You mustn't say that, we can't go outside in that rain. Should I sit here or should I sit here or should i sit an inch to the left?
If you don't mind behaving like a girl you'll seem the most masculine in the same way that if you don't mind looking gay you'll seem the most straight.
Now I'm not totally convinced of the above merits, but it's not without them. The rugby club is full of emotionally irrational men, the gym is full of narcissistic sports pimps. What with willpower being on the inside power doesn't try very hard to look like power, the masculine-looking are not necessarily, or even very often, leaders.
Depth and the ability to talk sounds like woman, but it's just intelligence. I can't really say women like masculinity when it's transparent and one-dimensional, lying constantly and witless to that in complete self-unawareness. A multi-faceted guy they seem to like, certainly not the guy to pigeon hole himself.
Every smart man has an inner Lisa Simpson that could deflate the crap out of her given half the chance. Remember women are a combination of Love, magic and fanaticism there'll be nailing nothing down to a science.
It would be incredibly English if Theresa May turns out to be the one who delivers Brexit I've been saying this since the referendum. Even when we created the industrial revolution and unleashed the greatest power mankind has ever known we found our own way to not sweep aside convention.
And I was mistaken before because third-worlders are not just homophobic they're anti-gay. The instinctive "yuck" we feel when two men kiss passionately isn't really any different to the fear of flying, and being afraid to fly isn't something we hound people to the ends of the earth over. LGBT coming out of the closet is identical to flying in an aeroplane, unusual things that would not occur if not for the advances of developed civilisation and make the many of us feel queasy. But that's the point. Flying in planes and travelling by horseless carriage and in fact most things we do today as second nature would have us accused of satanic withcraft by our earliest ancestors. But nevertheless flying will feel unnatural to some people and you can't punish someone for feeling weird about flying through the air in a tin can filled with other peoples farts.
Which boils down to the real point. You can't get people to be more tolerant by reversing civilisation and making the average man poorer. The last 30-40 years have been a story of it becoming harder and harder to stay alive(at least in the West and in Russia)at the same time as asking people to become more tolerant. This will not work because the insecure will not tolerate. From the position we're in now LGBT rights would be best served by talking less about LGBT and instead doing an economy that works.
We need tight borders and a diverse trade relationship with the world before the next economic downturn plunges the E.U. into chaos.
And if we’re made to remain the race is on to capture Europe with other friends and comrades of ours. Trump is/was America’s last chance and 5 years from now he may not be in office. Europe, however, is turning more nationalist by the day. Remember that Europe is twice as white as America and we are the actual natives here.
Modern society isn’t a race to have as many children as possible in order to not die out.
But it is for ni**ger and sand-ni**ger and that’s why they’re all homophobes. Oh and what a great power they’ve built over there, the peak of civilisation that’s what Africa and the Middle East are we should be more like them.
Because the point of Thatcherism was for everybody not responsible enough to own their own property to die out. Yes the property was monopolised by a few idle landlords however killing the poor would have prevented this trap we now find ourselves in. Basically they made looking after the poor ridiculously expensive in the hope that we’d stop doing it, but we didn’t and this is why half the money we spend on welfare pays for foreign cruises and holiday homes etc.
Thatcher was an easy time leader who used an ocean of free cash from the North Sea to destroy our coal miners and the rest.
In tough times being stubborn takes substance. Churchill and the Blitz to assert ourselves today will require strength, a capacity to endure. This isn’t the 1980s with its great big shoulder pads, actual broad shoulders matter now.
Difficult family members are character building for all concerned.
Loyalty to blood is part of your healthy instincts and you simply must refrain from thinking too much like a dollar bill. Romance isn’t transactional and dealing with those difficult family members isn’t transactional, they are in fact an important part of socialisation that helps to avoid singledom and being on here forever.
Family is the best example of no good deed goes unpunished. To even accept the idea of “loved ones” over profit and loss means you’re going to get hurt, but you can’t stay mad at them. From a business point of view family is a terrible thing, to hold loyalty to a person over loyalty to what can be got from a person is not profitable.
On average men work about 10 hours more a week than 50 years ago and for women it’s more like 20 hours. Most people are too stressed and overworked to think about what they do.
And then some have nothing at all to do and they lose interest in society in another way.
It isn’t usual to arrive at a situation by fortune or wisdom where you can meet your financial requirements working 15 hours a week. The work-life balance which belies the art of living from which the best arrangements are made.
It’s a slippery issue for democracy. In a democracy you are in reality more responsible for what your leaders do however because you can protest what the government does the country is forever blameless.
A democratic government is in your name - compared to any other form of government it is - but the democratic right is to declare “not in my name” and the issue with democracy is who is responsible.
The asset of strongmen leaders and authoritarians is to dismiss this issue. Take the people out of the equation and implode indivualism through apathy so that in a very real way you’re not responsible for what the government does, not considering yourself responsible for what the government does is the dream of aging and inherited democracy.
Safe loves danger, clever loves silly, and high self-esteem likes to embarrass itself.
There are some occasions whatever you consume or produce is precisely what you’re not. Satire works by knowing what sensible is, and horror film works by relating to the victim in it, not the predator. I’d bet that appreciating horror movies raises the odds that you’re harmless.
Wealthy liberal Russians of the St Petersburg type believe Russia is European and part of the West, but that’s not a popular view in Russia.
And the bolsheviks and the stalinists both capitalised on the Russian monarchy not really being considered Russian by the peasants. It goes back centuries the nationalist idea that there are European outposts(such as st Petersburg)controlling the masses of Russia.
The problem for Macron is that the working class it just too big to break trade union, dismantle the welfare state and implement regressive taxation to balance the budget. Neoliberalism requires a slow process of turning against your fellow countrymen and you don't turn on the 80% overnight, you split the bottom 40% first and work up over the years so that the country slowly develops into inequality; 8 parts ghetto to 2 parts sub-elite more like America.
Turn the country against itself over a long time in favour of the love of money. You have to condition people into believing they can all win the X Factor before they agree with winner takes all, in working people you need to nurture the sense that if you're losing less than the person next to you then you're winning. You can only do this by slowly turning the country against itself, each time you divide the working class you allow for enough winners and then later divide these winners. You bring it on in stages and that's how you win people over to fullblown soulless capitalism.
Macron is the Thatcherite and Trump isn't, that's the issue for the right. You still have the Thatcher-loving neocon shills trying to claim Trump as one of their own. The enemy has many faces.
The culture needs to find some sort of happy medium between the sense of being one false move away from starving and too big to fail. Too big to fail wasn't just the banks, it's an attitude to life fairly common in the first world and it's the reason we don't demand best man for the job to the same extent as before.
In many ways we ought to do what the left wants. We should annihilate all the courses from university which could not possibly exist without western privilege, such as feminist or general studies. A dramatic overassumption of adundance belies the downfall of merit, it wouldn't be a bad idea to ban all the courses that people simply wouldn't go to had they come from actual poverty.
All these quota goats would simply melt away by tackling the root cause; the problem in parenting encapsulated by the phrase "never let anybody tell you you're not good enough".
This wouldn't happen in the old system of making it on merit. When the point of the education was to educate as opposed to sell a diploma, the standards were better maintained when university was paid for you providing you were any good.
And that's what we have to do. To build an alliance between the kids at trade school and the kids who warrant being at university against the kids of inflated mediocrity, and you do this by going against the system of debt in favour of a system of grants. There must be no way for the average man to borrow money and enter university but every brilliant child gets in for free, the intelligent have to outnumber the average in advanced education or it won't be an education.
ChesneyChrist Forum Posts (7,144)
RE: Are you changing with the times ?
I remember when it was difficult to hold my views on putting the world to rights. Things we once called progress are now widely considered maladaptive and self-annihilating.